Best International Implementation
The e-Assessment Awards seek to showcase excellence in technology-enabled assessment.
The independent judging panel for this award will select the finalists from all the entries , based solely on the information provided in the application form. Please do read through the scope and criteria carefully.
Below are the updated scope and criteria for 2021.
This award seeks to acknowledge e-assessment organisations that have delivered innovative and effective programmes in one or more countries outside of their main country of operation. Projects may have been delivered at any scale in a single country or lower volumes in multiple countries.
In the context of this Award, 'International' relates to working outside of the entrant's home country, delivering one or more programmes in single or multiple countries.
We are looking to celebrate the international reach of e-assessment, recognising the challenges faced by organisations working outside of one's main country of operation, whilst still achieving excellence and ensuring relevant and valid assessment practices. Please note the key to this award lies in the process of implementation and commercial aspects of the programme, rather than just about the e-assessment aspect of the project.
We welcome testimonials in support of applications for this award.
Submissions will be judged according to how well they meet each of the six criteria below (max 300 words per criteria). We also request a brief overview, or executive summary for the judging panel (max 200 words).
Please do not submit any additional information, such as links to websites; this information will not be considered in initial shortlisting. Each submission will be considered on individual merit.
- Project Requirements: What did the project set out to achieve and how were the requirements of the project established? For applications from institutions and awarding bodies, what process did you then follow to select your project partner(s), both technical and regional? For applications from suppliers, how were the client and stakeholders engaged at this stage? If local partners were engaged, what were the selection criteria for these partners?
- Project Management: What was the approach to managing the programme to ensure successful delivery in each location? What were the success criteria used to judge the outcome for all key stakeholders? What challenges had to be overcome with each phase of the programme? What were the implications for the home business (for example programme management, partner management, coordination with a client, training, establishing local infrastructures)?
- Implementation: Is there evidence of a successful implementation strategy, including establishing agreed outcomes, alignment with organisational goals, engagement with key stakeholders, marketing, piloting, support services and evaluation? Was there a phased implementation and if so, why?
- Regional Challenges: What were the regional and cultural factors taken into account in the context of the e-assessment programme? For example, communication, language, attitudes to e-assessment, support services? How did you address the non-technical factors of implementation and support in another country, or in each country? Were there factors around local cost models and supporting a successful business model?
- Technical / Digital Challenges: Were there technological limitations or challenges in delivery? For example, bandwidth, local data protection laws, points of presence for cloud hosting, support and time zone differences? Explain how each example given was addressed.
- Scale and Complexity: What is the scale and complexity of the programme? For example, scope in a country or the number of countries involved, number of tests delivered, over what period(s)? What proportion was delivered in which country? What was the overall value of the programme and what was the export non-home market value of the programme in the context of the home market? Please note that the judges are looking to understand the programme better, not judge it by its size.